TonAPI vs WalletExplorer

Name: TonAPI vs WalletExplorer OpenChainBench measurements
Creator: OpenChainBench
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

TonAPI leads on the only live benchmark. TonAPI wins on Best wallet labeling API provider (35.9% vs 20.1%).

Read methodology Last measured Sat, 22 Aug 2026 02:14:56 UTCWindow: rolling 24h1 shared benchmark

TonAPI

REST API for the Gram (TON) blockchain. Returns account metadata, known entity names, and address book labels for Gram wallets.

WalletExplorer

Bitcoin address clusterer and labeler. Tracks exchange deposit clusters, mixers, and known services since 2013.

Side by side measurements

Best wallet labeling API provider

Aggregators

TonAPI

Leads

35.9 %

p99: 35.9%
rank: #7
samples: 680

WalletExplorer

Trails

20.1 %

p99: 20.1%
rank: #8
samples: 487

Coverage means the provider returned a non-empty label for the probed address, it says nothing about label quality or correctness. Read the EOA vs contract split before concluding: a provider can look strong overall while only labeling contracts (verified-source names) and missing every wallet. The Success column is fetch reliability (share of API calls that did not error), not labeling accuracy.

Frequently asked questions

TonAPI vs WalletExplorer: which one is better?

TonAPI and WalletExplorer are compared on 1 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. TonAPI leads on Best wallet labeling API provider. See the live table on this page for every metric.

Which is more reliable, TonAPI or WalletExplorer?

On the Best wallet labeling API provider benchmark, TonAPI leads at 35.9% versus WalletExplorer at 20.1%. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.

How is the TonAPI vs WalletExplorer comparison measured?

Every benchmark on this page uses the same open methodology, published at https://openchainbench.com/methodology. Data is CC-BY-4.0. Measurement harnesses are MIT-licensed.

How this pair was selected

Auto-generated pairs require: both providers in the same benchmark for seven consecutive days, at least 1000 samples per provider, observable third-party search demand, and a public /products/[slug] page on OCB. Editorially curated pairs (like this one) may publish early when search demand is high and data is accruing — panels with fewer than 100 samples are shown as provisional. The full pair ledger is versioned in the public repo.